Hello, this is my first real debate on this site so I'm a little nervous to see how it goes. I must warn my opponent that I am a Christian and as such will not be afraid to mention the moral aspect of this issue.
I am taking the Con side in this debate and I intend to prove to my opponent that abortion is disgraceful human murder and should be stopped! I also want to prove that the baby's right to life goes before the mother's right to choose. From the moment of conception the baby in the womb is a perfect work of art with everything it needs to sustain its life for the stage of growth it is in. A huge question that is often asked is at what point does a baby become a viable human being? Well what is the definition of "viable" at what point is the baby no longer just sperm and egg but a living human being with the same basic human right to life as the rest of us have? No one really agrees as to when this takes place so how can we say when it does not take place? The beginning of life is not a gradual process it takes place in an instant after that the development of the embryo in the womb is the same as outside the womb. I contend that life begins at the moment of conception when those cells begin to split and divide to form the child. So although the mother does have rights to her own body the baby, as a human being and citizen of the United states is entitled to the exact same rights.

1. Nearly all abortions take place in the first trimester (88%), when a fetus cannot exist independent of the mother. As it is attached by the placenta and umbilical cord, its health is dependent on her health, and cannot be regarded as a separate entity as it cannot exist outside her womb.
2. Fertilized eggs used for in vitro fertilization are also human lives and those not implanted are routinely thrown away. Is this murder, and if not, then how is abortion murder?
3. Only 8% of women who have abortions do not use any form of birth control, and that is due more to individual carelessness than to the availability of abortion.
4. The ability of a woman to have control of her body is critical to civil rights. Take away her reproductive choice and you step onto a slippery slope. If the government can force a woman to continue a pregnancy, what about forcing a woman to use contraception or undergo sterilization?
5. Teenagers who become mothers have grim prospects for the future. They are much more likely to leave of school; receive inadequate prenatal care; rely on public assistance to raise a child; develop health problems; or end up divorced.
6. Taxpayer dollars are used to enable poor women to access the same medical services as rich women, and abortion is one of these services. Funding abortion is no different from funding a war in the Mideast. For those who are opposed, the place to express outrage is in the voting booth.

It is impossible to determine when life actually starts. You say at conception; at this point, it is merely a mass of cells which have no merit of human life. Your belief in when life starts come from your religion, and this cannot be used as a legitimate point.
A women has actually is alive and has rights, should not sacrifice the right to dictate what she does with her own body because you believe it to be so.

While it is true that the fetus cannot exist without his mother during the 1st trimester this does not change with its birth. If a mother simply left the infant lying in his crib for days he would die and the mother would be charged with the murder of her baby. Just because the baby is dependent on its mother does not mean that it does not have a right to life. In the state of California it is legal have an abortion for non medical reasons up to 24 weeks, by this time the baby is considered able to survive outside the mother's womb. I would highly recommend the documentary "The Silent Scream" http://www.silentscream.org... This film shows the fetus that supposedly cannot feel pain trying its best to get away from the abortionists tool. At this stage in its life the baby can move, kick, and suck his thumb. it is even shown to jump when loud sounds or jolts frighten it.
Faye Wattleton, the longest reigning president of Planned Parenthood argued as far back as 1997 that everyone already knows that abortion kills. She proclaims the following in an interview with Ms. Magazine:

"I think we have deluded ourselves into believing that people don't know that abortion is killing. So any pretense that abortion is not killing is a signal of our ambivalence, a signal that we cannot say yes, it kills a fetus."

Prominent defenders of abortion rights publicly admit that abortion kills. They are not saying that abortion is morally defensible because it doesn't kill a distinct human entity. They are admitting that abortion does kill a distinct human entity, but argue it is morally defensible anyway. We'll get to their arguments later, but the point here is this: There is simply no debate among honest, informed people that abortion kills distinctly human beings.
The landmark verdict of Roe vs. Wade that made most abortions legal in the US is actually built on a claim that there is no way to say for sure if abortion kills or not abortion kills because no one can say for certain when life begins. Justice Harry Blackmun, who authored the majority opinion wrote:

"The judiciary, at this point in the development of man's knowledge, is not in a position to... resolve the difficult question of when life begins... since those trained in the respective disciplines of medicine, philosophy, and theology are unable to arrive at any consensus.?

Justice Blackmun's assertion is a ridiculous one, at least as it applies to the field of medicine. In biological terms, life's beginning is a settled fact. Individual human life begins at fertilization, and there are all sorts of authoritative, public resources to prove this.

I will now address your 4th point. "The ability of a woman to have control of her body is critical to civil rights. Take away her reproductive choice and you step onto a slippery slope. If the government can force a woman to continue a pregnancy, what about forcing a woman to use contraception or undergo sterilization?"

Abortion is not a woman's right anymore than murder is a serial killers right. If a there are thousands of couples who would give anything to adopt a child so nothing says a teenage mother, rape victim, or any other mother has to raise the child. Not allowing abortions really has nothing to do with a women's right on the other hand forced sterilization is taking away a woman's right that she has had since the beginning of time, The right to reproduce only recently have women decided they have the right to take the life of their own child's life.
As to your question about throwing away fertilized eggs, yes if the embryo has begun its development ending its growth at any stage is taking life.
And last but not least your argument about using our tax dollars is unfounded since a. abortions also cost tax dollars and b. Trying murderers and feeding and housing them in prison costs us money however nobody ever complains and says we should make murder legal.
I can't say that my Christian beliefs don't influence how I approach this issue however Many people would agree with me that abortion is murder which is a legal issue as well as a moral one.
My sources are as followes...http://www.christianaction.org.za... - info on cost of abortionshttp://www.cbsnews.com...http://www.baby2see.com...http://www.balancedpolitics.org...

1. First, babies are born both blind and deaf. Any seemingly reactive behavior is coincidence and is most likely the baby passing gas.
2. False, abortion does not kill distinctly human beings. It terminates a mass of cells which bare resemblance to the basic human bodily outline. You are projecting your own interpretations of personification upon the fetus, and claiming it has personality, feelings, and emotion. Just because a dog looks like it's smiling, does not mean that it is cognitively aware of it's projection of physical happiness. (No I am not comparing a dog to a fetus, but the projected personification is still the same.)
3. Life's beginning is not a settled fact; not sure where this claim comes from. Sure, the potential for further life development comes when the sperm meets the egg - but that, in no way shape or form, is what defines human life.
4. Your ridiculous assertion that abortion and serial murder are similar carries no merit, and honestly I shouldn't give the claim a second thought.
5. Yes, an unattended to baby outside of the womb will perish due to malnutrition or dehydration, but it is fully developed and a stable organism. A fetus in the womb could not have further growth, whatsoever, without the mother's food and water. What if the women cannot find sufficient nutrition due to poverty and the fetus miscarries; is this considered murder also?

Further points:
1. Making abortion illegal will do nothing to stop abortions. It will merely cause women to turn to more drastic, unsafe, and unhygienic means of termination.
2. It is the women's body, she should not be put under the trials and tribulations of pregnancy (including trauma, psychological distress, and physical damage) if she was raped, taken advantage of, or if her contraceptive measures have failed.
3. Giving a baby up for adoption carries massive psychological ramifications, and can scar a women for life.
4. Religious ideology carries no merit under the law.
5. 1/3 women will be sexual abused in her life time - should these 33% be forced to carry unwanted and unsafe babies?
6. Forcing a baby to be born into a sub-par socioeconomic family will merely exacerbate the issue of overpopulation, poverty, and crime. Sure the baby could grow up to cure cancer; but odds are that the child will become yet another victim or circumstance in a poor neighborhood. Do no romanticize the potential of children; think pragmatically.
7. Abortions are not done on a whim. Trust me, I've had friends go through this traumatic decision process. Let the people who it effects deal with it themselves; why the heck do you have a say? You are extremely lucky to not be effected by something like this, but as such, you have no say or perspective on whether abortion should be allowed.
8. Artificially fertilized egg embryo's are experimented on and disposed of in an extremely callous manner. Why don't you start petitioning to end embryonic testing?

Ok number 1. making murder illegal does little to stop the murder rate... so your argument is unfounded
2. It is the woman's body however that still does not give her the right to take her baby's life. Please explain to me why, if a woman is killed during her pregnancy that the person who killed her is charged with two counts or murder but a mother can kill the child herself and nobody gives it a 2nd thought?
3. Having an abortion has massive psychological effects that can scar a woman for life
4. so...
5. its not the baby's fault that the father was a jerk a baby is a baby no matter how it was conceived
6. Every child should be allowed a chance to live its life to the fullest if we go choosing who can have kids and who can kill them just because they are poor we are headed into the same situation as China.
7. Many times if the mother sees the ultrasound, hears the heartbeat, or feels the baby kick she would never abort it. this is the reason doctors try to tell her that her baby is not alive even when the president of planned parenthood said the baby is alive. Yes I am very lucky but that does not mean I don't know what these women go through, I have friends who have had to decide its not easy but doing the right thing is sometimes hard!
8. This debate is on abortion not embryonic testing! I have strong views on that subject but I don't care to bring them up in this debate.
In closing I would like to say that although Science cannot prove the time a baby becomes alive they also cannot say when he is not alive. do we really have a right to kill a baby we don't know for sure is not alive why would a baby grow for 6 months then one day wake up and say oh guess what I'm alive I know have rights under the constitution? Your argument about the baby being viable once he can be kept alive outside the womb well that all depends on were the mother goes if the mother goes to Vanderbilt the baby has rights under the constitution, however if she has the baby at the exact same time at her local clinic the baby can be killed since they can't keep him alive? If a baby is viable a baby is viable no matter were you go and he has the same right to life that any other human on earth has. I would like to end by saying I firmly believe that abortion is needless, cruel, and murder of completely helpless human life, it should be stopped!

Ok I re read your question "Fertilized eggs used for in vitro fertilization are also human lives and those not implanted are routinely thrown away. Is this murder, and if not, then how is abortion murder?" and I want to clarify that I am NOT against in vitro! those eggs have not yet begun forming and growing into a human baby so it is not the same to me... Sry I did not understand your question.

Yes if the mothers life is in danger I would say abortion is someting that would be life saving. and my arguments do mostly stem from my religious beliefs but also from the baby's right to life as a human and citizen on the United States